Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40706989›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2025

Clinical Implementation of Matched Tumor/Germline Sequencing Improves Accuracy of Tumor Genomic Profiling and Therapeutic Recommendations.

Danielle K Manning, Guruprasad Ananda, Cheryl Eifert, Vanesa Rojas-Rudilla, William Swanton, Shawn Keefe, Elizabeth P Garcia, Michael D'Eletto, Erica Holdmore, Satyakam Mishra and 21 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Tumor, germline, and paired testing in oncology: practical considerations.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors.

Danielle K ManningDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Guruprasad AnandaDepartment of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Cheryl EifertDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Vanesa Rojas-RudillaDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
William SwantonDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Shawn KeefeDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Elizabeth P GarciaDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Michael D'ElettoKnowledge Systems Group, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Erica HoldmoreDepartment of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Satyakam MishraDepartment of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kirill BorziakDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Pieter LukasseDepartment of Data Science, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Phani DavineniInformatics and Analytics, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Monica D ManamDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Priyanka ShivdasaniDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Arezou A GhazaniDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ai Ling WangDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Murat BastepeDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Himisha BeltranLank Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Katherine A JanewayPediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alanna ChurchDepartment of Pathology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alicia PollaciMedical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Anuradha B ChittendenCenter for Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Diane R KoellerCenter for Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alison Schwartz LevineCenter for Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Judy E GarberCenter for Cancer Genetics and Prevention, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bruce E JohnsonLowe Center for Thoracic Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Neal I LindemanDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jonathan A NowakDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Lynette M ShollDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Laura E MacConaillDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: laura_macconaill@dfci.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic profiling of cancers informs diagnostic and prognostic classification and aids in selection of targeted therapeutics. Targeted, next-generation sequencing of cancer-specific genes is clinically feasible and enables comprehensive somatic reporting; without a matched germline specimen, germline alterations can confound analyses of the somatic profile and generate uncertainty in interpretation. This work reports the validation and implementation of optional matched tumor/germline sequencing in a precision cancer medicine program. DNA from 63 patient samples was analyzed using OncoPanel, a hybrid capture-based sequencing assay of 461 genes. Three analytical pipelines were implemented: tumor only, matched tumor/germline, and germline only. For matched tumor/germline, germline alterations in 19 genes with actionable/therapeutic implications were rescued. Retrospective analysis of the first 1600 matched cases was done to determine the potential clinical utility of this approach. Limit of detection for point mutations/insertions and deletions was 3% allele fraction; reproducibility was >98%. Matched tumor/germline concordance across 938 somatic calls was 100%. The average tumor mutational burden (TMB) was approximately 4 mutations/Mb lower than tumor-only sequencing. TMB-high patients were accurately reclassified as TMB-low in 14% of cases. Twenty-five percent of validation cases (14% after launch) had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variant conferring cancer susceptibility; 14% of validation cases (7% after launch) harbored a germline variant of therapeutic significance. Matched tumor/germline sequencing is more accurate than tumor-only sequencing, while still encompassing all genomic findings that inform targeted therapy selection.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorGenomicsGerm-Line MutationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingNeoplasmsFemaleHumansMalePrecision MedicineReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID40706989
PMCPMC12597594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.